2019
DOI: 10.7589/2018-02-045
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reconsidering Oral Rabies Vaccine Bait Uptake Evaluation at Population Level: A Simple, Noninvasive, and Ethical Method by Fecal Survey Using a Physical Biomarker

Abstract: Tetracycline and rhodamine are bait uptake biomarkers commonly used for decades in oral rabies vaccination campaigns. They require tooth collection and the capture or death of animals. Here, we considered the use of marked baits with plastic beads, a physical biomarker allowing noninvasive scat survey by direct observation in the field. Such methodology would be in compliance with animal welfare concerns. The development of a relative bait uptake estimation on the basis of observation marked scat could indeed … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 9 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, analysis of tetracycline deposition in the teeth of animals that have ingested ORV baits is intrusive, time consuming, and requires animal anesthesia [5]. Alternatively, fecal analyses do not require capture and handling of animals, and could be a useful noninvasive sample [47]. This study suggests that rabies antibody responses may be reliably predicted via analysis of the volatile metabolome in fecal samples.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, analysis of tetracycline deposition in the teeth of animals that have ingested ORV baits is intrusive, time consuming, and requires animal anesthesia [5]. Alternatively, fecal analyses do not require capture and handling of animals, and could be a useful noninvasive sample [47]. This study suggests that rabies antibody responses may be reliably predicted via analysis of the volatile metabolome in fecal samples.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%